Re: Wal_keep_size

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Raj <rajeshkumar(dot)dba09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Carroll <tomfecarroll(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Wal_keep_size
Date: 2025-10-07 05:28:45
Message-ID: 25f8e8b5a47d9d0d12881b3d1b36e8a8bd6d89d2.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On Tue, 2025-10-07 at 10:22 +0530, Raj wrote:
> If wal_keep_size is more than max_wal_size wouldn't it always trigger checkpoint ?

No. "max_wal_size" has no direct connection with the size of WAL (and I
think we should have chosen a different name for that parameter). The
parameter is about the amount of WAL *generated since the latest checkpoint*,
not about the absolute amount of WAL present.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message André Verwijs 2025-10-07 09:55:46 Postgresql fedora - gpg key(s) not working/found ....
Previous Message Raj 2025-10-07 04:54:51 Re: Wal_keep_size